Judge: James A. Mangione, Case: 37-2022-00051836-CU-WT-CTL, Date: 2024-03-01 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - February 29, 2024

03/01/2024  09:00:00 AM  C-75 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:James A Mangione

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Wrongful Termination Discovery Hearing 37-2022-00051836-CU-WT-CTL SIMONTON VS ALPHA PROJECT FOR THE HOMELESS [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED:

This is a wrongful termination case in which Plaintiff alleges that, while he was jointly employed by Defendant Alpha Project for the Homeless ('Alpha Project') and Defendant City of San Diego ('City'), he was discriminated against and wrongfully terminated in retaliation for seeking disability accommodations and reporting unsafe working conditions. Plaintiff has propounded significant discovery upon Defendants, both of whom have filed for protective orders. City's motion for protective order is scheduled for April 5, 2024. Additionally, Alpha Project has filed a motion to quash five different subpoenas for production of business records, currently scheduled for May 10, 2024. The sheer scope of the challenged discovery and the multiple discovery motions filed has led the Court to conclude that a discovery referee is necessary.

Pursuant to CCP Section 639, the Court, on its own motion and in its discretion, finds that it is necessary to appoint a discovery referee to hear and determine any and all discovery motions in this action. A discovery referee is appropriate because of the multiple issues to be resolved, underlying disputes regarding privacy and because the discovery disputes appear to be constant and ongoing. (See, e.g., Taggares v. Superior Court (1998) 62 Cal.App.4th 94, 105.) The parties shall stipulate, if possible, to the selection of the discovery referee on or before March 22, 2024, and submit an order to the Court.

If the parties are unable to agree on the selection of the referee, the parties shall submit the names of three proposed discovery referees and the Court will select a discovery referee from those names. (CCP § 640.) The referee shall have the authority to set the date, time, and place for all hearings determined by the referee to be necessary; to direct the issuance of subpoenas; to preside over hearings; to take evidence; and to rule on objections, motions, and other requests made during the course of the hearing.

The Court shall seek the recommendation of the referee as to a fair allocation of the referee's fees.

Pursuant to this ruling, Alpha Project's Motion for Protective Order (ROA 31-33), City's Motion for Protective Order (ROA 27-29) and Alpha Project's Motion to Quash Subpoena (ROA 38-40) are ordered off-calendar.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3007811  36